Aperçu d'une anthropologie du vaccin: regards sur l'éthique d'une pratique humanitaire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deux pratiques interreliées, la médecine humanitaire et l'immunisation à caractère universel, posent certains problèmes d'éthique. Afin de jeter un peu de lumière sur la question, nous présenterons quelques balises historiques indispensables à la compréhension des programmes contemporains de vaccination et nous soulèverons certains problèmes anthropologiques que pose cette pratique au plan des représentations du corps et de la santé dans les populations. Deux exemples de pratiques humanitaires de vaccination, l'une exercée auprès d'une population autochtone et l'autre auprès de jeunes de la rue, permettent d'illustrer une réflexion portant sur la gestion des corps et sur la résistance démontrée par ceux-ci. Nous proposerons ensuite des pistes à suivre en vue de revoir l'éthique de la vaccination.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".